December 20, 2024 • 40 mins
In the new age of social media and constant information, it seems there are countless dating apps, often specializing in any number of increasingly specific demographics and romantic preferences. However, as the guys discover in the second chapter of this special two-part episode -- a single company, Match Group, owns around 2/3rds of these seemingly distinct apps. Does this mean the company is a monopoly? Further, what does this mean for users of the services? Tune in to learn more.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn this stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Nolan.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
They call me Ben. We're joined as ulways with our
super producer Andrew Treyforce Howard. Most importantly, you are you.
You are here. That makes this the stuff they don't
want you to know. Oh, hold the phone, super like us,
throw us a rose, whatever you must do. We're so
glad you're here. This is part two of a two
(00:50):
part series on the illuminati of online dating and guys
with the magic of editing. We're not quite sure where
this episode picks up, are we.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
No, But we're gonna find out in just a moment.
Speaker 4 (01:03):
Joining our show already in progress in media arrests, you
know the one here goes.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
Yeah, thanks for swiping right on the second episode, super
like us, Send us roses, Send us roses.
Speaker 3 (01:24):
Back to our Atlantic article. There's a great quote that
sums it up.
Speaker 5 (01:28):
That's right.
Speaker 4 (01:29):
On April twenty first, nineteenninety five, Cremen launchmatch dot Com
Match was a free service supported by ads, with the
idea to charge for subscriptions when it grew, and there
was only one way for it to reach that point.
Speaker 5 (01:40):
We need more women, Kremen.
Speaker 4 (01:43):
Shouted, like, it's not literally uh storming through No, he did.
He said it literally, well, storming through their basement office.
Speaker 3 (01:52):
Everyone wants to go to a party where there's women.
Speaker 5 (01:54):
It's not creepy at all.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
Yeah, every woman means ten guys join. He literally said
this out loud apparently as well.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
So let's talk about going to the club. Got club,
We're all fam When when you go to the club,
you may have noticed that clubs will generally allow groups
of women into the club. Why do they have why
do they have women's and eye ladies and night or
(02:21):
whatever they call those things. They will then have big lines,
generally of men waiting to get in, and they will
pay good money to go into that club. What I
think it's the exact same thing that begins to happen
here when Match says, hey, let's make these guys buy
access to this club essentially where there will be some women.
(02:43):
The women know that men are willing to buy their
way into this thing. They're they're committed to some extent,
there's some buy in to it, literally, so it's not
just a bunch of random dudes showing up on your.
Speaker 5 (02:58):
The bar entry the barriers.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Yeah, yeah, in your minds.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
Again, we're coming from a very we're telling you Gary's mentality,
which is very hetero sexual, to be quite honest.
Speaker 5 (03:15):
Right.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
So one of the things that fran does very well
here fran Meyer is she says, we have to be inclusive, right,
Everybody wants to meet someone, So how do we find
those people? How do we connect them, and how do
we make a little vigorous you know, in the process.
And it turns out the team was correct there. As
(03:41):
we study the evolution of dating apps, as we study
the evolution of match Group through its various iterations, what
we see is further inclusiveness such that it allows people
to gather data about you. This organization is a dating
(04:03):
app conglomerate today with millions of users and over forty
five seemingly distinct brands around the world. And these brands,
to your earlier points, guys, they use the same business model.
They're freemium, they're based on subscriptions, and those in app
what do we call them in video games.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
Micro transactions microaggressions as well. No, for sure, in app
purchases micro transactions, they don't seem like much at the time,
but add it up over the course of your use
of the app or the game, not to mention every
user's use of the app or the game, that's big money.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
Yeah. Look, I'll be one hundred with you, guys. I
have not had the privilege nor opportunity to do online dating.
I'm very excited about the gamification of the whole thing.
You know, do a little super like or throw a
rose or a bumb Do you throw a bumble?
Speaker 4 (05:06):
I think the issue, though, ben or that what I've
experienced is they're not upping your.
Speaker 5 (05:11):
Odds at all.
Speaker 4 (05:12):
Like it's really just kind of like preying on people
who think that if they pay this extra cost, they're
going to be more likely to get a match, and
that's just not true, especially if you're kind of, you know,
maybe not like some sort of traditionally attractive human being,
which I think these are focusing on and geared towards.
(05:33):
Is folks that think this will give them an edge,
when in fact it's just not true.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
Well, according to the creators, it's very true.
Speaker 5 (05:40):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (05:41):
The roses changed the game, I don't know, decided that
you should pay for roses.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
And they still call it a game too far.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Maybe, yeah, well it is. Yeah, it's so funny. They again,
it's just weird to hear the people who are in
charge of these things, because there's you know, there's a
there's a head of Tinder, there's a head of all
of them hins and but there's also a head of
match Group.
Speaker 3 (06:10):
And yeah, and.
Speaker 2 (06:12):
The way because it's all algorithm based, it's all algorithm
run and each one has its own algorithm, and each
of the algorithms is built a little differently and is
gamified in such a way. But you are so right.
They will not call it a game. They don't. It
is not that this is very serious business. This is
helping people find a partner.
Speaker 3 (06:34):
Oh gosh, yeah, yeah, it sure is. That's their singular philosophy, right,
which leads us to the other part. Is this a monopoly?
A match pretty much runs the online dating business. Like
they have what will call market capture. They own two
thirds of the dating app market easy in the West.
(06:57):
You could call it a monopoly, as the big fish
in the pond here I can't well, should have done
it plenty of.
Speaker 4 (07:06):
I just kind of feel like with business these days,
the question of whether or not something is a monopoly
is almost like missing the point because it just feels
like no one's being It's so rare for regulating groups
and government organizations to truly go after and bust up
monopolies anymore, and if they do, it seems to be
(07:27):
kind of like a gesture to show that we mean business.
But at the end of the day, like so many
things are monopolies, like MasterCard and Visa are monopolies, you know,
I mean, I.
Speaker 5 (07:37):
Just the term.
Speaker 4 (07:38):
It just seems to be changing and becoming more and
more amorphous and hard to pin down or at least
in terms of like what regulations actually exist. So I
would say, yes, it's definitely a monopoly, but does the
government care or does anybody really care?
Speaker 3 (07:52):
Ah, That's where we go into this, And I'm glad
you brought this up, because again it's the old parable
of the grocery store aisle looking for a box at
cereal and you see this vast panopoly on Aisle eleven,
Aisle twelve, whatever, tell us your aisle for cereal you
see all these things that look to be distinct brands,
(08:14):
they're ultimately owned by a handful of huge corporations. Match
Group is the hidden hand on the dating apps on
two thirds of them. Easy again, Now to your point, Noel,
we might rightly wonder why there's new anti trust action
going on. That's because according to the federal government of
(08:36):
the United States, it is not illegal to obtain a
monopoly through the use of superior products, innovation, or business acumen,
whatever that means, so long as you are not engaged
in criminal activity. And Match got to where it is
by aggressively acquiring other companies, brands, and the online dating space.
(09:02):
But they weren't really doing anything that any other company
wouldn't do.
Speaker 5 (09:09):
They were just kind of first to market.
Speaker 4 (09:10):
And then, like many big organizations like that that are
first to market, they have the power to buy up.
Speaker 5 (09:17):
All of their competitors and then put them under their umbrella.
Speaker 4 (09:20):
We know, we may surely we see that with Facebook
and and them buying up all the apps that could
potentially compete with their business or to fight against their
main flagship app, Facebook for example, becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Speaker 5 (09:33):
So they've got you know, Instagram to lean on. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
Well, in the case of match, they saw Tinder doing
something different, They're like, oh, wow, that's crazy, we need
to acquire them. And then he like Hinge came along
and they're like, oh, we're gonna we're the Tender killer
and they're like, oh, let's get that. And then they
like they still have the campaigns like Hinge. It's it's
not like Tinder get Hinge. It's so different get Hinge.
But then you get on Hinge and then it's all
(09:59):
the same users that are on Tender and you're matching
with the same people on the on a different app.
Speaker 5 (10:05):
What is happening?
Speaker 4 (10:06):
So it's sort of like giant beverage companies buying up
lo mom and pop breweries and giving the illusion that
you're getting some sort of bespoke, handmade product. And maybe
it still is, and obviously they changed the formulas oftentimes,
but you really are just still paying upstairs to Bevco
or whatever whatever the frick you know what I'm talking about,
Bush or what have you?
Speaker 3 (10:27):
Sure that's the one in bev Yeah, shout out young brands,
shout out how earlier grocery store serial example. We also
know the antitrust conversation would go a different way if
Match was supplying what would be considered an essential service
(10:49):
in terms of national security. So make no mistake. If
this single corporate entity controlled two thirds of the world's
fossil fuels, you know, there might be some conversations, some
very different ones. Shout out aside, hope you have a
good time with your roommate, Snowden.
Speaker 2 (11:11):
Yeah, I hope we have a good time with I
don't know, isis I mean this conversation.
Speaker 3 (11:16):
Hey, free Syrian Army is what they're.
Speaker 4 (11:18):
Showing one hundred exactly, I mean this whole conversation though,
about monopolies and the effects that they have on consumers.
There's a million different ways to slice it. And you're
absolutely right, Ben, you know, you know, compared to something
like fossil fuels or you know, armaments or what have you,
you know, I mean dating, you know, owning the dating
(11:38):
world online seems comparatively frivolous.
Speaker 5 (11:41):
Right.
Speaker 2 (11:44):
Well, yeah, and with that, we're going to take a
quick break. We'll be right back after we're from our sponsors.
Speaker 3 (11:57):
And we've returned. So this logically brings us to another question.
Given that Match owns so many things, do they have
a consistent to your question, Matt, do they have a
consistent philosophy and strategy across all these different dating services?
(12:18):
Put simply, does Match actually want its users to meet
what they would see as success?
Speaker 5 (12:27):
Like?
Speaker 3 (12:27):
Do they want you to fall in love? Does that
mean leaving the app? Is romance? True romance? Not the
movie the actual experience. Is it bad for business? With Match?
Speaker 5 (12:41):
Was it hinges like whole like sales pitch? Was that
I think we want you to quit? Like it? Is that?
Speaker 2 (12:50):
Right? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Hinge advertised itself as the dating app designed to.
Speaker 5 (12:54):
Be that's right.
Speaker 2 (12:55):
Yeah, yeah, okay, so until your boyfriend gets really busy
and then just load it back up on your phone
again and see what.
Speaker 5 (13:02):
Just to your point, Ben, like that people are already
thinking this.
Speaker 4 (13:05):
Therefore they were like, okay, we need to combat this,
you know, from a marketing standpoint. So the fact that
this is like already on people's minds probably, I think,
is really indicative of the trends.
Speaker 3 (13:17):
It's a real back of badgers. You know. It's well
and good for consumers to log onto an app to
create a profile find the love of their life. But
the truth is dating services make more consistent money when
their users return, when they keep coming back. That's why
you see what you were talking about, Matt, The gamified
(13:38):
elements across these apps, the notifications that want you to
always be plugged in. That's why you see the freemium model. Like, yeah,
you get a free profile, you know, post a picture
you holding a big fish, you know what I mean,
high fiving some who's a celebrity.
Speaker 5 (13:57):
Now I don't remember Stil O'Neill.
Speaker 3 (14:00):
Here's a picture you high five in Shaquille O'Neill. That
means that means you're tall, you know what I mean?
Speaker 5 (14:07):
Otherwise you look like baby hands. That would maybe not
be the best picture to bose.
Speaker 3 (14:12):
But then if you want to even if you are
high fiving Shaquille O'Neill while you guys went fishing, you
still are going to be pushed to pay money at
some point to get your super likes or you know,
your super swipes. God, I sound old to get a
(14:33):
higher visibility profile. Oh, or importantly to get the ability
to message people who have not shown interest in you.
Speaker 5 (14:42):
Yeah, but that's how weird. I didn't even know that
was a thing.
Speaker 4 (14:44):
And you'd think that the women on the apps wouldn't
want that.
Speaker 5 (14:48):
That would not be good.
Speaker 2 (14:50):
It's called dming, right, that's still a thing, but that's
on interest.
Speaker 5 (14:54):
Yeah, you're sneaking into those dms, but you're not supposed
to be able to do that.
Speaker 3 (14:57):
Daddy mom one.
Speaker 2 (15:00):
Sneak in.
Speaker 5 (15:00):
Man, it is flatten into those dms, you know.
Speaker 4 (15:04):
But again, that just seems to go against inherently against
the whole philosophy that made women be down with joining these.
Speaker 5 (15:10):
Apps in the first place.
Speaker 4 (15:11):
So it's sort of like moving the goalpost a little bit,
you know, by adding some of these extra features.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
Well, yeah, because we need engagement. Baby, it's a different
kind than you were maybe thinking about when you downloaded this.
Speaker 3 (15:25):
I will pay someone to validate me with an emoji.
Speaker 5 (15:31):
Just hit me with the thig. I remember what I
was gonna say.
Speaker 4 (15:33):
It just reminds me too of the way that all
social media apps, at the end of the day, these
are social media apps have gone with like you know,
big users, big celebrities that have a gazillion followers, every
one of their followers doesn't see every one of their posts,
and they they're they're you know, these companies like Facebook
and whatever, TikTok. I think you have to like you
(15:53):
pay in a little bit to make sure your post
gets wider distribution. You know, you cannot expect that just
it's because you have a five hundred thousand followers that
every one of those followers is going to see your post.
You're kind of getting what's the word shadow band or
whatever it Maybe that's the more extreme version, but this
is very much a thing just in social media in general.
Speaker 3 (16:13):
Yeah, yeah, it is a dopamine casino, and perhaps a
dangerous one.
Speaker 5 (16:18):
We know.
Speaker 3 (16:20):
To the earlier point about what we call being platform agnostic,
I love what you're bringing up here, No, because we
see that habitual users of dating applications tend to have
more than one app. If someone has a tender, they
have another thing. If someone has a bumble, they have
(16:42):
another thing. And the reason they have this is because
the popularity of this stuff moves with the fickle mercurial herd.
The field of dreams only works when there are other
people on the baseball field. So when you're in a
dead dating app, you feel kind of dumb. You feel
(17:04):
like you're wasting your time. See go to the next one.
And this is something that is easily leveraged. If you
own two thirds of the dating apps. Now you have
a consumer, not once, not twice, but multiple times. All
the money goes to you. Match makes money either way
(17:24):
as long as you keep using it. So for you know,
for some people looking for let's say, a consistent string
of less committed encounters, this is a win win. Of course,
you're going to keep using these apps because when they work,
it's the best way to find a new partner time
(17:46):
after time, time after time.
Speaker 2 (17:50):
Yeah, and find a new strain of gunnery. You know
what's there's crazy statistics about uh cases of goneria in
the United States, and chlamite and syphilis and just sexually
transmitted diseases. And I wonder if the hook up culture
has anything to do with it.
Speaker 5 (18:09):
Probably not, that's very much.
Speaker 3 (18:14):
Yeah, shout out the villages. We're going to leave that.
Speaker 2 (18:19):
And all every single cruise.
Speaker 3 (18:22):
Ever even Yeah, because you've been on cruises.
Speaker 2 (18:26):
Oh, I love me a cruise a little upside down pineapple.
They banned those. I can't do that anymore.
Speaker 3 (18:35):
Exactly what is that?
Speaker 2 (18:37):
I think it's a swinger thing. No, that's definitely a
swinger thing. Yeah, welcome, come on in, Come on in
to this room.
Speaker 5 (18:44):
We've got your keys in the bowl.
Speaker 3 (18:47):
Yeah, we're open to suggestions.
Speaker 5 (18:53):
Yes, no relationships. Yes, yeah it was.
Speaker 3 (19:03):
It was brilliant. This part of the episode is brought
to you by Disney Cruises. Oh that's very not upside
downline Apple or the best or the best or the
best good, Save Good, Save Matt. We got to think
about the economics at play. So these dating apps are
(19:25):
ultimately they are part of for profit companies, which means
that every time a couple successfully meets on a dating
app and you know, they run and have their their
wild romance, they have their happily ever after they leave
that dating app, which means that for profit entity has
(19:46):
lost two customers minimum. If we're going upside down Pineapple rules,
they maybe lost six. You know what I mean the
to an earlier joke we made off air. Uh, the
companies are aware of this, you know. Not for nothing
does Hinge advertise itself again as the dating app that
is designed to be deleted. But we have to ask
(20:09):
how do these applications thread the needle right? How do
they tothe line of remaining attractive to consumers, appearing to
help people, and at the same time ensuring some percentage
of those people will stay in the environment long enough
to help the bottom line. That's pretty I don't know, man,
(20:30):
that's a tough one.
Speaker 2 (20:31):
Well, it makes me think of a situation I've heard,
and I wonder how common it is and maybe if
you guys have heard of this or experienced this, this
thing that occurs. And again I'm only going off a
Reddit post, guys, so I really have no idea where
let's say there's a relationship that started from an online
dating service like one of these apps, right, and it's
(20:54):
going okay. Several months in, things seem to be pretty great,
but for one or another it's either becoming a little
not boring that's not the right word, a little old
hat to be with the same person in the fifth
month or something. And yes, and as a relationship begins,
(21:16):
that's kind of one of the things that occurs, and
scientifically psychologically, once you know that what they call the
honeymoon period kind of ends or is tapering off, and
a relationship, a true relationship begins. There's this thing that
I've seen where people will jump back on the apps,
not necessarily to go on a date with somebody else,
(21:38):
but to get that hit of oh other people still
think I'm attractive other people like me. People will talk
to me and converse with me like this, so that
you get that you get the dopamine hits, but you
also get that, I don't know, whatever that thing is
that it feels like you're getting validation from others, like
I'm still special even as my relationship that I'm building
(22:01):
is kind of slowing down.
Speaker 5 (22:02):
A little bit.
Speaker 3 (22:03):
Get that scratch behind your ears right.
Speaker 2 (22:07):
Well, yeah, and it makes me feel like it's something
that is a part of culture, seeping into culture where
you want or we need that validation in some way
from other people who are potential, like sexual mates, who
are not in our immediate circle or in our relationship.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
And this is going to lead us to an interesting
place because we'll see that folks who are kind of
relegated to the concept of gen z are tending to
reject online dating just for this reason, because they're feeling
that they themselves are gamified. I'd love to bring up
(22:44):
credit where due Greg Rozalski over a planet money from
MPR leads us to a larger disturbing trend, which we'll
see to the point about gen z and the wholehearted
or I guess the disturbing trends for online dating industries.
(23:05):
Greg notes a journalist called Quarry Doctro who says that
online dating is suffering from an online industry wide trend
called in shitification.
Speaker 5 (23:22):
I think it's pretty clear what that means.
Speaker 3 (23:24):
Yes, yes, Greg writes. Basically, doctor O says tech platforms
start off trying to make their user experiences really good
because their first goal is to try to become universally
popular and achieve economy of scale. Over time, they inevitably
(23:44):
pursue their ultimate goal of making money, which ends up
making the whole user experience in the podcast what you
see it across industries. Yeah, and I appreciate that we
have to point out there are critics of podcasting and
streaming services overall who have noticed something simpler or noted
(24:07):
something similar, particularly with the proliferation of ads. Let's just
say it, guys, that's true.
Speaker 4 (24:14):
It's true, and it's not something that folks who are
part of larger organizations have any control over them.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
Wait, like the three of us, Oh.
Speaker 3 (24:23):
Yeah, hey, four Andrews here. So in a real free market,
though in a truly free market, the adherence of the
dismal science, which is the street name for economics, They
would argue, the answer to these problems would be to
(24:43):
just pull up your ten stakes and go to a competitor, right, Like,
if you don't like the way one person is making
your hot sauce, go buy hot sauce somewhere else. You
get tired of tender, you go to Bumble. You get
tired of humble, you go to Hinge. The problem is
this is not hot sauce. There are fewer and fewer
(25:06):
actual competitors out there, right.
Speaker 2 (25:09):
Yeah, this is all It's all been Tabasco the whole.
Speaker 3 (25:12):
Time, the Tabasco, the kaiser SoSE of hot sauce.
Speaker 5 (25:18):
Still in my face, good one, classic formula. No complaints here.
Speaker 3 (25:23):
So we have to ask that why are there not
new dating apps taking over the scene. Are the old,
tried and true powers of monopoly? Are they preventing the
growth of new things, similar to the way older larger
trees block saplings from getting sunlight. Match does not think so.
(25:44):
To the earlier point, Match says, our goals are perfectly allied.
They say, look, we get invitations to weddings from people
who used to use it, like.
Speaker 4 (25:55):
All the Coperate Board of Trustees getting invitations to weddings.
Speaker 5 (26:00):
How do they even.
Speaker 3 (26:01):
Reach the dude?
Speaker 5 (26:01):
But I don't understand. That's Oh my goodness, that sounds
like some horseship.
Speaker 3 (26:06):
That's what they say though, that's what they say. And
they said, hey, also, if a happily married couple just
so happens to encourage their single friends to hop on
the merry go round the dopamine casino of online romance,
well that's whim wim for us denro course.
Speaker 4 (26:24):
And I just thought this might be a good time
to point out as well that you know, this is
an industry, maybe perhaps due to it's a certification that
you're talking about ben that's in decline. There's even a
term that's floating around online called the bumble fumble. There's
a really good article on The Guardian says bumble fumble
online dating apps struggle as people swear off swiping online
(26:46):
dating industry and crisis as shares fall and nearly half
of all users report negative experiences on the apps that
includes things like getting scammed, you know.
Speaker 5 (26:57):
Be talking to bots.
Speaker 4 (26:59):
Shares in Bump will crash thirty percent. This article came
out in August of twenty twenty four. By the way,
that month, August after a really bad earnings report came out.
Match Group, when we've been talking about mainly owners of
tender and match dot Com, Okay, cubit Hinge and others
also reported a a client in total number of paying
users for seven straight quarters, and the Pew Research Foundation
(27:24):
reported that nearly half of all online users and more
than half of female daters say they experienced very negative outcomes.
Speaker 2 (27:34):
Well, if you look at the yeah, if you go,
I've got Yahoo Finance up, guys, just looking at Match
Group Incorporated or mtcch and you can really see back
in twenty seventeen, as the stuff that we've been talking about,
all of these different apps begin populating and Matches acquiring
all of them, you can see its stock price goes
(27:57):
from like thirty bucks all the way up to upwards
of one hundred and fifty so one hundred and fifty
six bucks per share, and then plummeted back down to
around forty now like thirty something per share. And that
only you know, that was a span of five years
where it was that thing you're talking about. Ben they
defied once they had once they had it, you know,
(28:19):
on lock and enough users, and then everybody was and.
Speaker 4 (28:22):
I think as people start to experience that intification effect,
it starts to create a backlash where maybe while this
when it first started seemed like a really great solution,
now is starting to seem like more of a problem
than a solution. And I think people are trying to
advocate for more irl dating and just meeting people the
old fashioned way. There's always a backlash like that when
(28:44):
technology gets this like kind of stranglehold, right.
Speaker 3 (28:49):
And look, we're not saying that no one ever has
gotten married off of a dating app. We're not saying
that no one ever has written to the authors of
an app like this or a dating site and said, hey,
we want you to come celebrate our nuptials. But we
(29:12):
are saying the trends of monopolization hold true in pretty
much every single market where monopolies are allowed to flourish,
no matter what it is. Online dating not an exception.
Many people new to the idea of these apps, they
may have little to know concept of how big this
(29:33):
operation has become, how many seemingly distinct apps are really
just cuddly tentacles of a massive corporate entity out there
in the deep, pulling your money ultimately to the same
place and that's where we have to point it out.
Longtime fellow conspiracy realist, you know what we say about
(29:55):
informed consent.
Speaker 5 (29:57):
It's good.
Speaker 3 (30:00):
That's our stance. That's our hard stance on that. We'll
pause for a word from our sponsors, and we've returned.
Diving into the illuminati of online dating. Bonus points to
(30:22):
Greg by the way for freestyling a possible solution to
the dating app dilemma. What if there was an app,
and this is Greg's idea. I'm not going to steal
his idea. What if there was an app that only
got paid when users successfully match and then leave the app?
What if that is the freemium? What if what if
(30:43):
you only pay when you meet success?
Speaker 5 (30:46):
Putting your money where your mouth is.
Speaker 4 (30:48):
So that is well, that is how do you enforce it?
Speaker 2 (30:52):
Because you everybody would just say, oh, I never found
a match, come on, honey.
Speaker 5 (30:56):
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 4 (30:58):
It's like when Uber drivers they don't get shown where
they're supposed to drive their customer to until they do
the pickup, and then some of them will actually cancel
the ride and just get paid by the person individually
off app. It's the easiest thing in the world to do,
and a little bit hard to track her enforce.
Speaker 3 (31:15):
Oh yeah, maybe we have an uber episode on the
way as well. We have to say it, guys, We
have to say it, folks. The creators of Match and
all the employees working their past, present in future. They
are not supervillains. We assure you. There is no one
waking up gleefully dancing at the idea of ruining a
(31:39):
relationship so they will have a user spending more money
to mend their broken heart. The business depends upon being
able to point to success. It's kind of like the dealers.
I was thinking about this. It's like the dealers at
a Vegas casino. They're obeying the rules of a game
that the users agreed to play. So whether you're swiping
(32:03):
right on tender, whether you're doubling down on like, you know,
an eleven or something, I don't know, all black.
Speaker 5 (32:09):
Sep you're pretty good at it.
Speaker 4 (32:12):
But it also benefits the house for people to witness
somebody making big, striking it big on one of those machines.
They got to pay out, you know, legally, that is
definitely a casino regulation that they have to pay out
a certain amount of time.
Speaker 5 (32:26):
We've talked about this on the show.
Speaker 4 (32:27):
But that is also a big moment where someone walking
through the casino sees that happen and says, that could
be me.
Speaker 5 (32:33):
So if there weren't some success on these apps, they'd
be worthless.
Speaker 4 (32:36):
And that was you know, maybe more in line with
the creation of the app that got people on board.
And now that indification I got to keep saying it's
such a great word has really led to decreased success
stories and has led to a like a kind of
an exodus of these users.
Speaker 2 (32:54):
Yeah, it's just it for me, it's been kind of
terrible just they even exist. But I and I wonder
if that if it causes any other types of anxieties
that I'm not thinking it does.
Speaker 4 (33:08):
Create a certain throwaway culture of relationships, you know, as
kind of like, well, if this one doesn't work out,
I'm just back on the apps and the fact that
app is there in your mind, and I think reasonably
so you're thinking, well, there's just there's just she's just
a swipe away from replacing me.
Speaker 5 (33:26):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (33:26):
Well, and and with those apps, as we said, they
want engagement. So all they really want is for you
to be talking with people, messaging people, and engaging in
some other way with people not it doesn't mean they
don't get anything if you actually go on a date.
Speaker 5 (33:40):
Ever, right, there's no way of even tracking that.
Speaker 4 (33:42):
There's no box to tick saying date, you know, achievement
unlocked or whatever, you get a gold star.
Speaker 5 (33:48):
It's not a thing.
Speaker 2 (33:50):
They get something if you either paid for something or
if you saw an ad, which just means you're going
through different screens.
Speaker 4 (33:57):
On the social media platform, that's what it's just a
little more insular and a little more like not open
to the public. And again, on Instagram, you can have
a private profile, so there are ways of doing that
as well. But let's make no mistake, these apps are
social media platforms. They're just of a different flavor.
Speaker 3 (34:16):
I appreciate that point. I'd also like to give if
we could take our hats off. We're an audio show,
so everybody imagine us taking our hats off. In commemoration
of all our friends, our bros, our sisses, our loved
(34:36):
ones who thought Tender would solve their problems. I want
to give a special shout out to the multiple friends
of mine who got super into online dating. And I'll
give an anonymous shout out here. One person described it
to me as an actor in the Atlanta area as
(34:58):
an unending series auditions, and sometimes you end up asking yourself,
why am I at this audition for a part? I
did not want to play dude? And that is a
pretty poetic summation of the dopamine casino.
Speaker 4 (35:17):
I completely agree, and I did just I think I
just sort of glossed over it. But in that article
in The Guardian, there was another stat that said that
around fifty percent of users of these types of apps
that they polled have felt as though they were targeted
by some sort of scam. And I just wanted to
(35:37):
point out that I maybe mentioned this before. I was
on jury duty here in Atlanta a year or two ago,
and I didn't actually get picked, but I got to
the point of like selection where they kind of give
you a little bit of a rundown of the case,
and it became very clear that it was about a
robbery and kidnapping that took place when someone swiped on
(35:58):
a dating app and was targeted and robbed and you know,
taking advantage of and in pretty horrific ways. I did
not actually get to be part of the trial, but
I got enough of the information to realize that was
the case. And if i'm you know, in my limited
experience with this kind of stuff, ran across a case
like that, I'm sure there's a heck of a lot
more of.
Speaker 3 (36:17):
Them, and we hope those people are okay. There are
so many other controversies we have yet to get to,
involving cases of assault, involving incredibly heinous things up to
and beyond murder. This does happen in this strange casino.
(36:39):
We'd like to give a special thanks again to the
fantastic work of the good folks at Land of the
Giants Dating Games Episode two in particular, that podcast dives
deep into the backstory of match groups, so please check
out their work for more information free wherever you find
your favorite shows. We're not we're not paid to co
(37:02):
sign this. We just think they did very good work.
Speaker 2 (37:06):
Yeah, definitely shout out to Sanjeitta and Latschmi who hosted that.
Speaker 5 (37:10):
Again.
Speaker 2 (37:10):
We went through the entire season seven very very good.
Speaker 3 (37:14):
And here at the very end of twenty twenty four
is the humans call it. Should you, like so many
other people on this planet, be looking for love online
or in person, We wish you the best, without reservation.
Please remember there is one honest god solution to the
(37:35):
idea of finding true love. Learn to trust and love yourself,
do your best to be the kind of person that
you one day could love.
Speaker 2 (37:47):
And set boundaries.
Speaker 3 (37:48):
It sounds a little hallmarky, but I think it's true,
you know, and that's.
Speaker 5 (37:52):
Part of love. I don't man. Here we go.
Speaker 3 (37:56):
It's a two parter, so find us you know.
Speaker 5 (37:59):
Definitely agree with you, Ben and Matt as well.
Speaker 4 (38:01):
Boundaries are very, very important, whether you're online dating or
dating IRL or.
Speaker 5 (38:05):
Just even with your friends.
Speaker 4 (38:07):
You know, It's it's something that I think cannot be
overstated how important teaching people as Ben, you taught me
this expression to how to treat you and not accept
anything less than what you deserve.
Speaker 3 (38:19):
And this is the end of our two part series
on the Illuminati of online dating. We want to hear
your thoughts. We hope this finds you well amid grand adventure.
We hope that you are doing your best to be
the kind of person that you can love and to
set some boundaries. We have three ways you can contact
(38:40):
us on the internet via email, on telephone lines, and
then on just the regular onlines. We're on We're not
on Farmers only anymore. I had to had to pull
out at that where.
Speaker 4 (38:53):
My farmers had for a beanie I'm wearing right now,
keeping my skull alarm. You can find us all over
the internet, sad at the handle Conspiracy Stuff, where we
exist on Facebook, where we have.
Speaker 5 (39:03):
Our Facebook group Here's where it gets crazy, as well
as on.
Speaker 4 (39:06):
X FKA, Twitter and YouTube where we have video content
for your perusing enjoyment on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 5 (39:11):
However, we are Conspiracy Stuff a show.
Speaker 2 (39:15):
We have a phone number. It is one eight three
three std WYTK. When you call in, give yourself a
cool nickname and let us know if we can use
your name and message on the air. We highly recommend
you put that number in your phone as a contact
just in case it gives you a little ring back.
If you've got more to say than can fit in
a three minute message, why out instead send us a
(39:36):
good old fashioned email.
Speaker 3 (39:38):
We are the entities that read every piece of correspondence
we receive. Be well aware, yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
writes back, we love it when you email us. Send
us more email, send us more weird joke, Send us
your experiences in the trenches of online dating, we got
your six, we got your back. We'll see out here
(40:00):
in the dark. Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (40:22):
Stuff they don't want you to know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn this stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Nolan.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
They call me Ben. We're joined as ulways with our
super producer Andrew Treyforce Howard. Most importantly, you are you.
You are here. That makes this the stuff they don't
want you to know. Oh, hold the phone, super like us,
throw us a rose, whatever you must do. We're so
glad you're here. This is part two of a two
(00:50):
part series on the illuminati of online dating and guys
with the magic of editing. We're not quite sure where
this episode picks up, are we.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
No, But we're gonna find out in just a moment.
Speaker 4 (01:03):
Joining our show already in progress in media arrests, you
know the one here goes.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
Yeah, thanks for swiping right on the second episode, super
like us, Send us roses, Send us roses.
Speaker 3 (01:24):
Back to our Atlantic article. There's a great quote that
sums it up.
Speaker 5 (01:28):
That's right.
Speaker 4 (01:29):
On April twenty first, nineteenninety five, Cremen launchmatch dot Com
Match was a free service supported by ads, with the
idea to charge for subscriptions when it grew, and there
was only one way for it to reach that point.
Speaker 5 (01:40):
We need more women, Kremen.
Speaker 4 (01:43):
Shouted, like, it's not literally uh storming through No, he did.
He said it literally, well, storming through their basement office.
Speaker 3 (01:52):
Everyone wants to go to a party where there's women.
Speaker 5 (01:54):
It's not creepy at all.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
Yeah, every woman means ten guys join. He literally said
this out loud apparently as well.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
So let's talk about going to the club. Got club,
We're all fam When when you go to the club,
you may have noticed that clubs will generally allow groups
of women into the club. Why do they have why
do they have women's and eye ladies and night or
(02:21):
whatever they call those things. They will then have big lines,
generally of men waiting to get in, and they will
pay good money to go into that club. What I
think it's the exact same thing that begins to happen
here when Match says, hey, let's make these guys buy
access to this club essentially where there will be some women.
(02:43):
The women know that men are willing to buy their
way into this thing. They're they're committed to some extent,
there's some buy in to it, literally, so it's not
just a bunch of random dudes showing up on your.
Speaker 5 (02:58):
The bar entry the barriers.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Yeah, yeah, in your minds.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
Again, we're coming from a very we're telling you Gary's mentality,
which is very hetero sexual, to be quite honest.
Speaker 5 (03:15):
Right.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
So one of the things that fran does very well
here fran Meyer is she says, we have to be inclusive, right,
Everybody wants to meet someone, So how do we find
those people? How do we connect them, and how do
we make a little vigorous you know, in the process.
And it turns out the team was correct there. As
(03:41):
we study the evolution of dating apps, as we study
the evolution of match Group through its various iterations, what
we see is further inclusiveness such that it allows people
to gather data about you. This organization is a dating
(04:03):
app conglomerate today with millions of users and over forty
five seemingly distinct brands around the world. And these brands,
to your earlier points, guys, they use the same business model.
They're freemium, they're based on subscriptions, and those in app
what do we call them in video games.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
Micro transactions microaggressions as well. No, for sure, in app
purchases micro transactions, they don't seem like much at the time,
but add it up over the course of your use
of the app or the game, not to mention every
user's use of the app or the game, that's big money.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
Yeah. Look, I'll be one hundred with you, guys. I
have not had the privilege nor opportunity to do online dating.
I'm very excited about the gamification of the whole thing.
You know, do a little super like or throw a
rose or a bumb Do you throw a bumble?
Speaker 4 (05:06):
I think the issue, though, ben or that what I've
experienced is they're not upping your.
Speaker 5 (05:11):
Odds at all.
Speaker 4 (05:12):
Like it's really just kind of like preying on people
who think that if they pay this extra cost, they're
going to be more likely to get a match, and
that's just not true, especially if you're kind of, you know,
maybe not like some sort of traditionally attractive human being,
which I think these are focusing on and geared towards.
(05:33):
Is folks that think this will give them an edge,
when in fact it's just not true.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
Well, according to the creators, it's very true.
Speaker 5 (05:40):
Guys.
Speaker 2 (05:41):
The roses changed the game, I don't know, decided that
you should pay for roses.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
And they still call it a game too far.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Maybe, yeah, well it is. Yeah, it's so funny. They again,
it's just weird to hear the people who are in
charge of these things, because there's you know, there's a
there's a head of Tinder, there's a head of all
of them hins and but there's also a head of
match Group.
Speaker 3 (06:10):
And yeah, and.
Speaker 2 (06:12):
The way because it's all algorithm based, it's all algorithm
run and each one has its own algorithm, and each
of the algorithms is built a little differently and is
gamified in such a way. But you are so right.
They will not call it a game. They don't. It
is not that this is very serious business. This is
helping people find a partner.
Speaker 3 (06:34):
Oh gosh, yeah, yeah, it sure is. That's their singular philosophy, right,
which leads us to the other part. Is this a monopoly?
A match pretty much runs the online dating business. Like
they have what will call market capture. They own two
thirds of the dating app market easy in the West.
(06:57):
You could call it a monopoly, as the big fish
in the pond here I can't well, should have done
it plenty of.
Speaker 4 (07:06):
I just kind of feel like with business these days,
the question of whether or not something is a monopoly
is almost like missing the point because it just feels
like no one's being It's so rare for regulating groups
and government organizations to truly go after and bust up
monopolies anymore, and if they do, it seems to be
(07:27):
kind of like a gesture to show that we mean business.
But at the end of the day, like so many
things are monopolies, like MasterCard and Visa are monopolies, you know,
I mean, I.
Speaker 5 (07:37):
Just the term.
Speaker 4 (07:38):
It just seems to be changing and becoming more and
more amorphous and hard to pin down or at least
in terms of like what regulations actually exist. So I
would say, yes, it's definitely a monopoly, but does the
government care or does anybody really care?
Speaker 3 (07:52):
Ah, That's where we go into this, And I'm glad
you brought this up, because again it's the old parable
of the grocery store aisle looking for a box at
cereal and you see this vast panopoly on Aisle eleven,
Aisle twelve, whatever, tell us your aisle for cereal you
see all these things that look to be distinct brands,
(08:14):
they're ultimately owned by a handful of huge corporations. Match
Group is the hidden hand on the dating apps on
two thirds of them. Easy again, Now to your point, Noel,
we might rightly wonder why there's new anti trust action
going on. That's because according to the federal government of
(08:36):
the United States, it is not illegal to obtain a
monopoly through the use of superior products, innovation, or business acumen,
whatever that means, so long as you are not engaged
in criminal activity. And Match got to where it is
by aggressively acquiring other companies, brands, and the online dating space.
(09:02):
But they weren't really doing anything that any other company
wouldn't do.
Speaker 5 (09:09):
They were just kind of first to market.
Speaker 4 (09:10):
And then, like many big organizations like that that are
first to market, they have the power to buy up.
Speaker 5 (09:17):
All of their competitors and then put them under their umbrella.
Speaker 4 (09:20):
We know, we may surely we see that with Facebook
and and them buying up all the apps that could
potentially compete with their business or to fight against their
main flagship app, Facebook for example, becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Speaker 5 (09:33):
So they've got you know, Instagram to lean on. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
Well, in the case of match, they saw Tinder doing
something different, They're like, oh, wow, that's crazy, we need
to acquire them. And then he like Hinge came along
and they're like, oh, we're gonna we're the Tender killer
and they're like, oh, let's get that. And then they
like they still have the campaigns like Hinge. It's it's
not like Tinder get Hinge. It's so different get Hinge.
But then you get on Hinge and then it's all
(09:59):
the same users that are on Tender and you're matching
with the same people on the on a different app.
Speaker 5 (10:05):
What is happening?
Speaker 4 (10:06):
So it's sort of like giant beverage companies buying up
lo mom and pop breweries and giving the illusion that
you're getting some sort of bespoke, handmade product. And maybe
it still is, and obviously they changed the formulas oftentimes,
but you really are just still paying upstairs to Bevco
or whatever whatever the frick you know what I'm talking about,
Bush or what have you?
Speaker 3 (10:27):
Sure that's the one in bev Yeah, shout out young brands,
shout out how earlier grocery store serial example. We also
know the antitrust conversation would go a different way if
Match was supplying what would be considered an essential service
(10:49):
in terms of national security. So make no mistake. If
this single corporate entity controlled two thirds of the world's
fossil fuels, you know, there might be some conversations, some
very different ones. Shout out aside, hope you have a
good time with your roommate, Snowden.
Speaker 2 (11:11):
Yeah, I hope we have a good time with I
don't know, isis I mean this conversation.
Speaker 3 (11:16):
Hey, free Syrian Army is what they're.
Speaker 4 (11:18):
Showing one hundred exactly, I mean this whole conversation though,
about monopolies and the effects that they have on consumers.
There's a million different ways to slice it. And you're
absolutely right, Ben, you know, you know, compared to something
like fossil fuels or you know, armaments or what have you,
you know, I mean dating, you know, owning the dating
(11:38):
world online seems comparatively frivolous.
Speaker 5 (11:41):
Right.
Speaker 2 (11:44):
Well, yeah, and with that, we're going to take a
quick break. We'll be right back after we're from our sponsors.
Speaker 3 (11:57):
And we've returned. So this logically brings us to another question.
Given that Match owns so many things, do they have
a consistent to your question, Matt, do they have a
consistent philosophy and strategy across all these different dating services?
(12:18):
Put simply, does Match actually want its users to meet
what they would see as success?
Speaker 5 (12:27):
Like?
Speaker 3 (12:27):
Do they want you to fall in love? Does that
mean leaving the app? Is romance? True romance? Not the
movie the actual experience. Is it bad for business? With Match?
Speaker 5 (12:41):
Was it hinges like whole like sales pitch? Was that
I think we want you to quit? Like it? Is that?
Speaker 2 (12:50):
Right? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Hinge advertised itself as the dating app designed to.
Speaker 5 (12:54):
Be that's right.
Speaker 2 (12:55):
Yeah, yeah, okay, so until your boyfriend gets really busy
and then just load it back up on your phone
again and see what.
Speaker 5 (13:02):
Just to your point, Ben, like that people are already
thinking this.
Speaker 4 (13:05):
Therefore they were like, okay, we need to combat this,
you know, from a marketing standpoint. So the fact that
this is like already on people's minds probably, I think,
is really indicative of the trends.
Speaker 3 (13:17):
It's a real back of badgers. You know. It's well
and good for consumers to log onto an app to
create a profile find the love of their life. But
the truth is dating services make more consistent money when
their users return, when they keep coming back. That's why
you see what you were talking about, Matt, The gamified
(13:38):
elements across these apps, the notifications that want you to
always be plugged in. That's why you see the freemium model. Like, yeah,
you get a free profile, you know, post a picture
you holding a big fish, you know what I mean,
high fiving some who's a celebrity.
Speaker 5 (13:57):
Now I don't remember Stil O'Neill.
Speaker 3 (14:00):
Here's a picture you high five in Shaquille O'Neill. That
means that means you're tall, you know what I mean?
Speaker 5 (14:07):
Otherwise you look like baby hands. That would maybe not
be the best picture to bose.
Speaker 3 (14:12):
But then if you want to even if you are
high fiving Shaquille O'Neill while you guys went fishing, you
still are going to be pushed to pay money at
some point to get your super likes or you know,
your super swipes. God, I sound old to get a
(14:33):
higher visibility profile. Oh, or importantly to get the ability
to message people who have not shown interest in you.
Speaker 5 (14:42):
Yeah, but that's how weird. I didn't even know that
was a thing.
Speaker 4 (14:44):
And you'd think that the women on the apps wouldn't
want that.
Speaker 5 (14:48):
That would not be good.
Speaker 2 (14:50):
It's called dming, right, that's still a thing, but that's
on interest.
Speaker 5 (14:54):
Yeah, you're sneaking into those dms, but you're not supposed
to be able to do that.
Speaker 3 (14:57):
Daddy mom one.
Speaker 2 (15:00):
Sneak in.
Speaker 5 (15:00):
Man, it is flatten into those dms, you know.
Speaker 4 (15:04):
But again, that just seems to go against inherently against
the whole philosophy that made women be down with joining these.
Speaker 5 (15:10):
Apps in the first place.
Speaker 4 (15:11):
So it's sort of like moving the goalpost a little bit,
you know, by adding some of these extra features.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
Well, yeah, because we need engagement. Baby, it's a different
kind than you were maybe thinking about when you downloaded this.
Speaker 3 (15:25):
I will pay someone to validate me with an emoji.
Speaker 5 (15:31):
Just hit me with the thig. I remember what I
was gonna say.
Speaker 4 (15:33):
It just reminds me too of the way that all
social media apps, at the end of the day, these
are social media apps have gone with like you know,
big users, big celebrities that have a gazillion followers, every
one of their followers doesn't see every one of their posts,
and they they're they're you know, these companies like Facebook
and whatever, TikTok. I think you have to like you
(15:53):
pay in a little bit to make sure your post
gets wider distribution. You know, you cannot expect that just
it's because you have a five hundred thousand followers that
every one of those followers is going to see your post.
You're kind of getting what's the word shadow band or
whatever it Maybe that's the more extreme version, but this
is very much a thing just in social media in general.
Speaker 3 (16:13):
Yeah, yeah, it is a dopamine casino, and perhaps a
dangerous one.
Speaker 5 (16:18):
We know.
Speaker 3 (16:20):
To the earlier point about what we call being platform agnostic,
I love what you're bringing up here, No, because we
see that habitual users of dating applications tend to have
more than one app. If someone has a tender, they
have another thing. If someone has a bumble, they have
(16:42):
another thing. And the reason they have this is because
the popularity of this stuff moves with the fickle mercurial herd.
The field of dreams only works when there are other
people on the baseball field. So when you're in a
dead dating app, you feel kind of dumb. You feel
(17:04):
like you're wasting your time. See go to the next one.
And this is something that is easily leveraged. If you
own two thirds of the dating apps. Now you have
a consumer, not once, not twice, but multiple times. All
the money goes to you. Match makes money either way
(17:24):
as long as you keep using it. So for you know,
for some people looking for let's say, a consistent string
of less committed encounters, this is a win win. Of course,
you're going to keep using these apps because when they work,
it's the best way to find a new partner time
(17:46):
after time, time after time.
Speaker 2 (17:50):
Yeah, and find a new strain of gunnery. You know
what's there's crazy statistics about uh cases of goneria in
the United States, and chlamite and syphilis and just sexually
transmitted diseases. And I wonder if the hook up culture
has anything to do with it.
Speaker 5 (18:09):
Probably not, that's very much.
Speaker 3 (18:14):
Yeah, shout out the villages. We're going to leave that.
Speaker 2 (18:19):
And all every single cruise.
Speaker 3 (18:22):
Ever even Yeah, because you've been on cruises.
Speaker 2 (18:26):
Oh, I love me a cruise a little upside down pineapple.
They banned those. I can't do that anymore.
Speaker 3 (18:35):
Exactly what is that?
Speaker 2 (18:37):
I think it's a swinger thing. No, that's definitely a
swinger thing. Yeah, welcome, come on in, Come on in
to this room.
Speaker 5 (18:44):
We've got your keys in the bowl.
Speaker 3 (18:47):
Yeah, we're open to suggestions.
Speaker 5 (18:53):
Yes, no relationships. Yes, yeah it was.
Speaker 3 (19:03):
It was brilliant. This part of the episode is brought
to you by Disney Cruises. Oh that's very not upside
downline Apple or the best or the best or the
best good, Save Good, Save Matt. We got to think
about the economics at play. So these dating apps are
(19:25):
ultimately they are part of for profit companies, which means
that every time a couple successfully meets on a dating
app and you know, they run and have their their
wild romance, they have their happily ever after they leave
that dating app, which means that for profit entity has
(19:46):
lost two customers minimum. If we're going upside down Pineapple rules,
they maybe lost six. You know what I mean the
to an earlier joke we made off air. Uh, the
companies are aware of this, you know. Not for nothing
does Hinge advertise itself again as the dating app that
is designed to be deleted. But we have to ask
(20:09):
how do these applications thread the needle right? How do
they tothe line of remaining attractive to consumers, appearing to
help people, and at the same time ensuring some percentage
of those people will stay in the environment long enough
to help the bottom line. That's pretty I don't know, man,
(20:30):
that's a tough one.
Speaker 2 (20:31):
Well, it makes me think of a situation I've heard,
and I wonder how common it is and maybe if
you guys have heard of this or experienced this, this
thing that occurs. And again I'm only going off a
Reddit post, guys, so I really have no idea where
let's say there's a relationship that started from an online
dating service like one of these apps, right, and it's
(20:54):
going okay. Several months in, things seem to be pretty great,
but for one or another it's either becoming a little
not boring that's not the right word, a little old
hat to be with the same person in the fifth
month or something. And yes, and as a relationship begins,
(21:16):
that's kind of one of the things that occurs, and
scientifically psychologically, once you know that what they call the
honeymoon period kind of ends or is tapering off, and
a relationship, a true relationship begins. There's this thing that
I've seen where people will jump back on the apps,
not necessarily to go on a date with somebody else,
(21:38):
but to get that hit of oh other people still
think I'm attractive other people like me. People will talk
to me and converse with me like this, so that
you get that you get the dopamine hits, but you
also get that, I don't know, whatever that thing is
that it feels like you're getting validation from others, like
I'm still special even as my relationship that I'm building
(22:01):
is kind of slowing down.
Speaker 5 (22:02):
A little bit.
Speaker 3 (22:03):
Get that scratch behind your ears right.
Speaker 2 (22:07):
Well, yeah, and it makes me feel like it's something
that is a part of culture, seeping into culture where
you want or we need that validation in some way
from other people who are potential, like sexual mates, who
are not in our immediate circle or in our relationship.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
And this is going to lead us to an interesting
place because we'll see that folks who are kind of
relegated to the concept of gen z are tending to
reject online dating just for this reason, because they're feeling
that they themselves are gamified. I'd love to bring up
(22:44):
credit where due Greg Rozalski over a planet money from
MPR leads us to a larger disturbing trend, which we'll
see to the point about gen z and the wholehearted
or I guess the disturbing trends for online dating industries.
(23:05):
Greg notes a journalist called Quarry Doctro who says that
online dating is suffering from an online industry wide trend
called in shitification.
Speaker 5 (23:22):
I think it's pretty clear what that means.
Speaker 3 (23:24):
Yes, yes, Greg writes. Basically, doctor O says tech platforms
start off trying to make their user experiences really good
because their first goal is to try to become universally
popular and achieve economy of scale. Over time, they inevitably
(23:44):
pursue their ultimate goal of making money, which ends up
making the whole user experience in the podcast what you
see it across industries. Yeah, and I appreciate that we
have to point out there are critics of podcasting and
streaming services overall who have noticed something simpler or noted
(24:07):
something similar, particularly with the proliferation of ads. Let's just
say it, guys, that's true.
Speaker 4 (24:14):
It's true, and it's not something that folks who are
part of larger organizations have any control over them.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
Wait, like the three of us, Oh.
Speaker 3 (24:23):
Yeah, hey, four Andrews here. So in a real free market,
though in a truly free market, the adherence of the
dismal science, which is the street name for economics, They
would argue, the answer to these problems would be to
(24:43):
just pull up your ten stakes and go to a competitor, right, Like,
if you don't like the way one person is making
your hot sauce, go buy hot sauce somewhere else. You
get tired of tender, you go to Bumble. You get
tired of humble, you go to Hinge. The problem is
this is not hot sauce. There are fewer and fewer
(25:06):
actual competitors out there, right.
Speaker 2 (25:09):
Yeah, this is all It's all been Tabasco the whole.
Speaker 3 (25:12):
Time, the Tabasco, the kaiser SoSE of hot sauce.
Speaker 5 (25:18):
Still in my face, good one, classic formula. No complaints here.
Speaker 3 (25:23):
So we have to ask that why are there not
new dating apps taking over the scene. Are the old,
tried and true powers of monopoly? Are they preventing the
growth of new things, similar to the way older larger
trees block saplings from getting sunlight. Match does not think so.
(25:44):
To the earlier point, Match says, our goals are perfectly allied.
They say, look, we get invitations to weddings from people
who used to use it, like.
Speaker 4 (25:55):
All the Coperate Board of Trustees getting invitations to weddings.
Speaker 5 (26:00):
How do they even.
Speaker 3 (26:01):
Reach the dude?
Speaker 5 (26:01):
But I don't understand. That's Oh my goodness, that sounds
like some horseship.
Speaker 3 (26:06):
That's what they say though, that's what they say. And
they said, hey, also, if a happily married couple just
so happens to encourage their single friends to hop on
the merry go round the dopamine casino of online romance,
well that's whim wim for us denro course.
Speaker 4 (26:24):
And I just thought this might be a good time
to point out as well that you know, this is
an industry, maybe perhaps due to it's a certification that
you're talking about ben that's in decline. There's even a
term that's floating around online called the bumble fumble. There's
a really good article on The Guardian says bumble fumble
online dating apps struggle as people swear off swiping online
(26:46):
dating industry and crisis as shares fall and nearly half
of all users report negative experiences on the apps that
includes things like getting scammed, you know.
Speaker 5 (26:57):
Be talking to bots.
Speaker 4 (26:59):
Shares in Bump will crash thirty percent. This article came
out in August of twenty twenty four. By the way,
that month, August after a really bad earnings report came out.
Match Group, when we've been talking about mainly owners of
tender and match dot Com, Okay, cubit Hinge and others
also reported a a client in total number of paying
users for seven straight quarters, and the Pew Research Foundation
(27:24):
reported that nearly half of all online users and more
than half of female daters say they experienced very negative outcomes.
Speaker 2 (27:34):
Well, if you look at the yeah, if you go,
I've got Yahoo Finance up, guys, just looking at Match
Group Incorporated or mtcch and you can really see back
in twenty seventeen, as the stuff that we've been talking about,
all of these different apps begin populating and Matches acquiring
all of them, you can see its stock price goes
(27:57):
from like thirty bucks all the way up to upwards
of one hundred and fifty so one hundred and fifty
six bucks per share, and then plummeted back down to
around forty now like thirty something per share. And that
only you know, that was a span of five years
where it was that thing you're talking about. Ben they
defied once they had once they had it, you know,
(28:19):
on lock and enough users, and then everybody was and.
Speaker 4 (28:22):
I think as people start to experience that intification effect,
it starts to create a backlash where maybe while this
when it first started seemed like a really great solution,
now is starting to seem like more of a problem
than a solution. And I think people are trying to
advocate for more irl dating and just meeting people the
old fashioned way. There's always a backlash like that when
(28:44):
technology gets this like kind of stranglehold, right.
Speaker 3 (28:49):
And look, we're not saying that no one ever has
gotten married off of a dating app. We're not saying
that no one ever has written to the authors of
an app like this or a dating site and said, hey,
we want you to come celebrate our nuptials. But we
(29:12):
are saying the trends of monopolization hold true in pretty
much every single market where monopolies are allowed to flourish,
no matter what it is. Online dating not an exception.
Many people new to the idea of these apps, they
may have little to know concept of how big this
(29:33):
operation has become, how many seemingly distinct apps are really
just cuddly tentacles of a massive corporate entity out there
in the deep, pulling your money ultimately to the same
place and that's where we have to point it out.
Longtime fellow conspiracy realist, you know what we say about
(29:55):
informed consent.
Speaker 5 (29:57):
It's good.
Speaker 3 (30:00):
That's our stance. That's our hard stance on that. We'll
pause for a word from our sponsors, and we've returned.
Diving into the illuminati of online dating. Bonus points to
(30:22):
Greg by the way for freestyling a possible solution to
the dating app dilemma. What if there was an app,
and this is Greg's idea. I'm not going to steal
his idea. What if there was an app that only
got paid when users successfully match and then leave the app?
What if that is the freemium? What if what if
(30:43):
you only pay when you meet success?
Speaker 5 (30:46):
Putting your money where your mouth is.
Speaker 4 (30:48):
So that is well, that is how do you enforce it?
Speaker 2 (30:52):
Because you everybody would just say, oh, I never found
a match, come on, honey.
Speaker 5 (30:56):
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 4 (30:58):
It's like when Uber drivers they don't get shown where
they're supposed to drive their customer to until they do
the pickup, and then some of them will actually cancel
the ride and just get paid by the person individually
off app. It's the easiest thing in the world to do,
and a little bit hard to track her enforce.
Speaker 3 (31:15):
Oh yeah, maybe we have an uber episode on the
way as well. We have to say it, guys, We
have to say it, folks. The creators of Match and
all the employees working their past, present in future. They
are not supervillains. We assure you. There is no one
waking up gleefully dancing at the idea of ruining a
(31:39):
relationship so they will have a user spending more money
to mend their broken heart. The business depends upon being
able to point to success. It's kind of like the dealers.
I was thinking about this. It's like the dealers at
a Vegas casino. They're obeying the rules of a game
that the users agreed to play. So whether you're swiping
(32:03):
right on tender, whether you're doubling down on like, you know,
an eleven or something, I don't know, all black.
Speaker 5 (32:09):
Sep you're pretty good at it.
Speaker 4 (32:12):
But it also benefits the house for people to witness
somebody making big, striking it big on one of those machines.
They got to pay out, you know, legally, that is
definitely a casino regulation that they have to pay out
a certain amount of time.
Speaker 5 (32:26):
We've talked about this on the show.
Speaker 4 (32:27):
But that is also a big moment where someone walking
through the casino sees that happen and says, that could
be me.
Speaker 5 (32:33):
So if there weren't some success on these apps, they'd
be worthless.
Speaker 4 (32:36):
And that was you know, maybe more in line with
the creation of the app that got people on board.
And now that indification I got to keep saying it's
such a great word has really led to decreased success
stories and has led to a like a kind of
an exodus of these users.
Speaker 2 (32:54):
Yeah, it's just it for me, it's been kind of
terrible just they even exist. But I and I wonder
if that if it causes any other types of anxieties
that I'm not thinking it does.
Speaker 4 (33:08):
Create a certain throwaway culture of relationships, you know, as
kind of like, well, if this one doesn't work out,
I'm just back on the apps and the fact that
app is there in your mind, and I think reasonably
so you're thinking, well, there's just there's just she's just
a swipe away from replacing me.
Speaker 5 (33:26):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (33:26):
Well, and and with those apps, as we said, they
want engagement. So all they really want is for you
to be talking with people, messaging people, and engaging in
some other way with people not it doesn't mean they
don't get anything if you actually go on a date.
Speaker 5 (33:40):
Ever, right, there's no way of even tracking that.
Speaker 4 (33:42):
There's no box to tick saying date, you know, achievement
unlocked or whatever, you get a gold star.
Speaker 5 (33:48):
It's not a thing.
Speaker 2 (33:50):
They get something if you either paid for something or
if you saw an ad, which just means you're going
through different screens.
Speaker 4 (33:57):
On the social media platform, that's what it's just a
little more insular and a little more like not open
to the public. And again, on Instagram, you can have
a private profile, so there are ways of doing that
as well. But let's make no mistake, these apps are
social media platforms. They're just of a different flavor.
Speaker 3 (34:16):
I appreciate that point. I'd also like to give if
we could take our hats off. We're an audio show,
so everybody imagine us taking our hats off. In commemoration
of all our friends, our bros, our sisses, our loved
(34:36):
ones who thought Tender would solve their problems. I want
to give a special shout out to the multiple friends
of mine who got super into online dating. And I'll
give an anonymous shout out here. One person described it
to me as an actor in the Atlanta area as
(34:58):
an unending series auditions, and sometimes you end up asking yourself,
why am I at this audition for a part? I
did not want to play dude? And that is a
pretty poetic summation of the dopamine casino.
Speaker 4 (35:17):
I completely agree, and I did just I think I
just sort of glossed over it. But in that article
in The Guardian, there was another stat that said that
around fifty percent of users of these types of apps
that they polled have felt as though they were targeted
by some sort of scam. And I just wanted to
(35:37):
point out that I maybe mentioned this before. I was
on jury duty here in Atlanta a year or two ago,
and I didn't actually get picked, but I got to
the point of like selection where they kind of give
you a little bit of a rundown of the case,
and it became very clear that it was about a
robbery and kidnapping that took place when someone swiped on
(35:58):
a dating app and was targeted and robbed and you know,
taking advantage of and in pretty horrific ways. I did
not actually get to be part of the trial, but
I got enough of the information to realize that was
the case. And if i'm you know, in my limited
experience with this kind of stuff, ran across a case
like that, I'm sure there's a heck of a lot
more of.
Speaker 3 (36:17):
Them, and we hope those people are okay. There are
so many other controversies we have yet to get to,
involving cases of assault, involving incredibly heinous things up to
and beyond murder. This does happen in this strange casino.
(36:39):
We'd like to give a special thanks again to the
fantastic work of the good folks at Land of the
Giants Dating Games Episode two in particular, that podcast dives
deep into the backstory of match groups, so please check
out their work for more information free wherever you find
your favorite shows. We're not we're not paid to co
(37:02):
sign this. We just think they did very good work.
Speaker 2 (37:06):
Yeah, definitely shout out to Sanjeitta and Latschmi who hosted that.
Speaker 5 (37:10):
Again.
Speaker 2 (37:10):
We went through the entire season seven very very good.
Speaker 3 (37:14):
And here at the very end of twenty twenty four
is the humans call it. Should you, like so many
other people on this planet, be looking for love online
or in person, We wish you the best, without reservation.
Please remember there is one honest god solution to the
(37:35):
idea of finding true love. Learn to trust and love yourself,
do your best to be the kind of person that
you one day could love.
Speaker 2 (37:47):
And set boundaries.
Speaker 3 (37:48):
It sounds a little hallmarky, but I think it's true,
you know, and that's.
Speaker 5 (37:52):
Part of love. I don't man. Here we go.
Speaker 3 (37:56):
It's a two parter, so find us you know.
Speaker 5 (37:59):
Definitely agree with you, Ben and Matt as well.
Speaker 4 (38:01):
Boundaries are very, very important, whether you're online dating or
dating IRL or.
Speaker 5 (38:05):
Just even with your friends.
Speaker 4 (38:07):
You know, It's it's something that I think cannot be
overstated how important teaching people as Ben, you taught me
this expression to how to treat you and not accept
anything less than what you deserve.
Speaker 3 (38:19):
And this is the end of our two part series
on the Illuminati of online dating. We want to hear
your thoughts. We hope this finds you well amid grand adventure.
We hope that you are doing your best to be
the kind of person that you can love and to
set some boundaries. We have three ways you can contact
(38:40):
us on the internet via email, on telephone lines, and
then on just the regular onlines. We're on We're not
on Farmers only anymore. I had to had to pull
out at that where.
Speaker 4 (38:53):
My farmers had for a beanie I'm wearing right now,
keeping my skull alarm. You can find us all over
the internet, sad at the handle Conspiracy Stuff, where we
exist on Facebook, where we have.
Speaker 5 (39:03):
Our Facebook group Here's where it gets crazy, as well
as on.
Speaker 4 (39:06):
X FKA, Twitter and YouTube where we have video content
for your perusing enjoyment on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 5 (39:11):
However, we are Conspiracy Stuff a show.
Speaker 2 (39:15):
We have a phone number. It is one eight three
three std WYTK. When you call in, give yourself a
cool nickname and let us know if we can use
your name and message on the air. We highly recommend
you put that number in your phone as a contact
just in case it gives you a little ring back.
If you've got more to say than can fit in
a three minute message, why out instead send us a
(39:36):
good old fashioned email.
Speaker 3 (39:38):
We are the entities that read every piece of correspondence
we receive. Be well aware, yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
writes back, we love it when you email us. Send
us more email, send us more weird joke, Send us
your experiences in the trenches of online dating, we got
your six, we got your back. We'll see out here
(40:00):
in the dark. Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (40:22):
Stuff they don't want you to know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Stuff They Don't Want You To Know News
Hosts And Creators
Matt Frederick
Ben Bowlin
Noel Brown
Show Links
RSSStoreAboutLive ShowsPopular Podcasts
Monster: BTK
'Monster: BTK', the newest installment in the 'Monster' franchise, reveals the true story of the Wichita, Kansas serial killer who murdered at least 10 people between 1974 and 1991. Known by the moniker, BTK – Bind Torture Kill, his notoriety was bolstered by the taunting letters he sent to police, and the chilling phone calls he made to media outlets. BTK's identity was finally revealed in 2005 to the shock of his family, his community, and the world. He was the serial killer next door. From Tenderfoot TV & iHeartPodcasts, this is 'Monster: BTK'.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
The Bobby Bones Show
Listen to 'The Bobby Bones Show' by downloading the daily full replay.